That's probably the whole point - they "just sleep" in their small single occupancy rooms and do most of their socializing in attractive common areas.

If you're wondering how the kids are going to hook up - well, window or not, single-occupancy beats the hell out of literal room-mates, which was my dorm experience. And we sure as hell found a way.

If you ask students whether they'd rather have a windowless private room or a shared room with a window, what do you think the breakdown will be?

According to Munger that was, indeed, the whole point. His dorm design focused on making the common areas nice places where people would enjoy spending time, while optimizing the dorm rooms for bed-related activities. It seems like a reasonable strategy.

Unless you’re an introvert in which case this design is maximally wrong.

You don't even need to be an introvert to want a quiet place to study that isn't also as dark as a closet and entirely without fresh air.

Yes, but I'm trying to phrase my response in a way that even the most unrepentant of sociopaths can understand.

Though I doubt introverts desire a roommate, either.

Ideally the common areas are plentiful enough that you can enjoy some solitude outside of the sleeping room (at least for some of the day).

There are other dormitories on campus. One size doesn't fit all, but you've got to work on the margin.

Two years and two roommates, they literally only spent their time in our shared room when they went to bed. 95% of waking hours, they were in communal area or classes. Myself, on the other hand, I liked my window and full room for half the price. Although we really need to figure out the communal area for society, because bars, parks, and cafes in the US are not even close to cutting it for how communal people are in college.